20:01:53 #startmeeting tc 20:01:54 Meeting started Tue May 6 20:01:53 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is ttx. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 20:01:55 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 20:01:57 The meeting name has been set to 'tc' 20:01:59 Yay, first meeting of the Juno membership! 20:02:02 o/ 20:02:10 The agenda for today is intentionally light, mostly around selecting chair and making some announcements: 20:02:11 welcome new people 20:02:15 i'm here 20:02:21 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/TechnicalCommittee 20:02:25 welcome :) 20:02:31 First things first, we should approve the new membership into governance: 20:02:37 #link https://review.openstack.org/92395 20:02:49 would be good to approve it now with 7+ yes 20:02:56 jaypipes: or, you know, very old people 20:03:05 mordred: :P 20:03:07 he's not THAT old 20:03:21 o/ 20:03:28 sort of here - at least until this plane takes off 20:03:33 although I guess it could count as a basic change 20:03:41 devananda: is attending mordred style 20:03:55 looks like we've got 7 20:04:06 ack 20:04:08 Yeah, it should be trivial to vote it thorugh 20:04:08 approved 20:04:14 #topic Selection of the TC chair 20:04:20 heh 20:04:25 This role is defined in the Foundation bylaws and the TC Charter. 20:04:36 Do we nominate people? I don't remember 20:04:38 The TC chair is responsible for making sure meetings are held according to the rules of our charter, and for communicating the decisions taken during those meetings to the Board of Directors and the OpenStack community at large. 20:04:59 Basically, the chair organizes and chairs the meetings, keeps track of resolutions and votes, sends out minutes when needed, maintains the TC wiki pages [3], keeps track of the Active Technical Contributors roster, etc. 20:05:08 (and for being prepared enough to copy and paste stuff into irc during meetings rather than making us wait while he/she types) 20:05:27 the [3] gives it away though 20:05:33 Since that's part of my job description I'm happy to continue doing it. Do we have other candidates ? 20:05:36 * jaypipes nominates ttx 20:05:40 I nominate ttx 20:05:43 +1 20:05:44 ++ 20:05:55 definitely :) 20:06:00 +1 20:06:02 +1 20:06:03 Oh why, here is a change to vote on that! 20:06:09 LOL 20:06:11 #link https://review.openstack.org/92461 20:06:12 haha 20:06:15 * vishy is shocked 20:06:16 ttx: thou plan hast failed. 20:06:17 +1 20:06:35 +1 20:06:56 Heh, fastest approval ever 20:07:04 That has its 7 votes 20:07:19 Thanks everyone! 20:07:26 Congrats! 20:07:29 (sucker) 20:07:29 no, thank YOU 20:07:37 indeed 20:07:48 #topic TC meeting time 20:07:56 Shall we keep this time and place for the TC meeting ? 20:08:06 So... who is horribly hurt if we shift this meeting by an hour to being later in the day? 20:08:07 I think we actually reduced our exposition to weird TZ his time 20:08:18 mikal: me 20:08:28 This is a 5am start for me, but I can keep doing it if its the least worst choice 20:08:33 I just want you guys to feel sorry for me 20:08:48 and one hour later is the project/release meeting 20:08:51 mikal: hour or two later is fine with me 20:09:11 * ttx wouldn't look forward having that meeting at 1am 20:09:15 i'm flexible, but want to attend both -- maybe we can swap them? 20:09:28 Swapping wouldn't help me 20:09:29 jeblair: wouldn't solve mikal's issue though 20:09:36 If its really 1am for ttx, let's stick with this time 20:09:45 I knew the meeting time when I ran 20:09:49 I just want sympathy hugs 20:09:52 well, would end at 1am IF we push back one hour 20:09:55 * jaypipes sends hugs 20:09:58 Heh 20:10:09 course, they won't get there until tomorrow.. 20:10:12 stupid round earth 20:10:30 * mordred hands mikal a cat 20:10:35 mikal: I'm happy to help you find a new home near UTC time 20:10:47 ttx: do you want to do a vote resolution thingie for the meeting time? 20:10:49 mikal: we also have internet! 20:10:55 mikal: not really 20:11:01 ttx: I like my home. We have snakes. 20:11:09 ttx: just a concesus here then? 20:11:16 let's keep it the way it is and revisit once we miss mikal a few times 20:11:17 I'm +1 on staying at this time then 20:11:44 #topic Live TC gathering/dinner in Atlanta 20:11:50 mordred: how is the organization of the TC dinner going ? 20:12:55 going well 20:13:06 although I need to call a person and give them my credit card details 20:13:12 confirmed on Thursday ? 20:13:14 yah 20:13:19 let it be me, please, let it be me! 20:13:25 * ttx books 20:13:30 I figure we meet up outside of the last session 20:13:34 and go over together 20:13:37 sounds good 20:13:42 sounds good 20:13:50 +1 20:13:53 also - somebody should let lifeless and markmcclain know too? 20:14:02 you mean jgriffith 20:14:03 there was at one point a talk of a non dinner gathering 20:14:06 I do? 20:14:08 ok 20:14:10 damn 20:14:12 * mordred sucks 20:14:17 yes. in fact, markmcclain is right here 20:14:19 What time was it again? 20:14:27 mikal: after the last summit session 20:14:28 Straight after the summit sessions? 20:14:30 yeah 20:14:33 ok 20:14:39 meet at summit session, wander over/get cabs 20:14:51 where are we wandering? 20:14:55 try not to have cabs run off the road 20:15:02 http://www.millerunion.com 20:15:19 sweet he was finalist of beard award yesterday 20:15:21 sdague: so true 20:15:23 sdague: we already have a few gatherings scheduled with the TC/BoD thing and the ops meeting meet the TC thing 20:15:25 oh I'll have to figure out what to wear. what a bother. 20:15:34 sdague: no highways to worry about this time 20:15:38 jaypipes: we have a private room 20:15:44 jaypipes: so don't worry about it 20:15:48 * devananda updates calendar 20:15:49 :) 20:16:32 jaypipes: just wear something. 20:16:36 please. 20:16:43 toga! 20:17:00 #topic Joint BoD/TC meeting in Atlanta 20:17:01 :) 20:17:15 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/11May2014JointMeeting 20:17:17 Sunday before summit, between 3pm and 5pm we'll have the joint TC/BoD meeting 20:17:27 agenda at link markmc posted 20:17:29 this hour with 11 topics? 20:17:35 (I copy paste but i can adapt) 20:17:35 lightning talk format or what? 20:17:44 mordred: I am here ;) 20:17:46 It will be followed by a dinner at 6:30pm, where the Foundation staff and the User committee are also invited 20:17:58 Dinner will be at Der Biergarten (2 blocks from the Omni / Georgia World Congress Center) 300 Marietta St NW 20:18:33 markmc: no comment :) 20:18:57 we're close to 40 people at this meeting, right? 20:18:58 I think those are board meeting minutes, not metric minutes. 20:19:20 the board has never been this ambitious with their agenda 20:19:24 and this is even more people :) 20:19:39 11 topics does seem a little agressive 20:19:52 * aggressive 20:20:00 lifeless: we're doing TC dinner Thursday night and you're invited 20:20:03 especially with everyoe around the table wanting to talk to show why they are present 20:20:18 mordred: cool 20:20:30 vishy: I'm pretty sure we won't end at 5pm, but rather at 6:30pm 20:20:33 yeah, i think we'll need to keep to a strict schedule 20:21:25 jeblair: we might need to skip some topics to give more time to others 20:21:58 I'd like to make sure we get to "Clarify devs usage of the OpenStack trademark" 20:22:19 as well have at least 5min to raise the 'CLA' issue 20:22:34 depends on whether we think we can actually solve them, or if the benefit is to try to get to some common ground on all of them 20:22:48 mordred: will you be sending invites via mail ? 20:22:50 did we discuss the priorities on these topics at an earlier meeting? 20:22:51 the product management question is most interesting to me 20:23:08 lifeless: nope. meet us after the final session of the day thursday and you can tag along 20:23:11 * devananda drops offthe meeting as the plane takes off 20:23:27 dhellmann: we made a list of suggestions, and the board accepted almost all of them in the agenda 20:23:40 and didn't add much of its own 20:23:44 ttx: ok, I was wondering about how the times were allocated 20:23:57 oh, this isn't just our portion of the agenda? 20:23:59 dhellmann: I just accepted Alan's time allocation 20:24:39 dhellmann: those two hours are the part that is allocated to the joint meeting yes 20:24:46 got it 20:25:41 a lot of these topics seem like things that aren't going to be solved by a meeting with the board, and the things that *are* important to discuss in person haven't been given much time 20:26:21 dhellmann: I think the goal is to discuss and align on a set of priorities, as well as let a few problems surface 20:26:28 ok 20:26:52 well, anyway, we'll see how it goes 20:26:54 is there a leader for each of those topics? 20:27:00 does anyone already know they won't be able to make it ? 20:27:01 might be more effective 20:27:15 markmc: that's a good idea 20:27:16 markmc: I agree having a moderator would help 20:27:20 mordred: meed you where 20:27:24 *meet* you where 20:27:26 leader gives 60 second intro, 10 minutes for comments from others, then move on 20:27:27 markmc: but I think it needs to be someone who doesn't hold a storng stance 20:27:38 I would expect the alan to moderate, but we should have someone ready to speak briefly on each topic 20:27:45 markmc: i.e. the moderator has to stay out of the conversation and just guide 20:27:48 markmc: the meeting is co-chaired by Alan and myself, but that doesn't mean we'd be the best moderators for EVERY topic 20:28:20 markmc: I'll reach to Alan and try to put a name in front of all of those 20:28:22 yeah, I'm talking more about someone to introduce the topic and talk about it 20:28:31 probably should be the person who proposed it for the agenda :) 20:28:43 does the board follow any formal rules for running its meetings? would those apply here? 20:28:46 #action ttx to reach to Alan to see if we can have a moderator for each topic to speed up meeting 20:29:00 dhellmann: it's not a board meeting, so those rules wouldn't apply 20:29:18 #action ttx to prepare the homework reading for the board 20:29:20 ok, just trying to set my expectations appropriately 20:29:34 ttx: please send us the homework too 20:29:44 ttx: so we have a shared starting state 20:29:57 mikal: that would probably be a couple of my blogposts on the hitory of the TC 20:30:16 I need to check if what I wrote back then still applies 20:30:18 ttx: oh, ok. 20:30:32 mikal: it's like "before the TC there was the PPB 20:30:33 ttx: if it does, we should put it in the history section of the governance repo for safe-keeping 20:30:33 " 20:30:34 ttx: I was thinking more specific to the topics under discussion than that 20:30:57 mikal: oh, no, it's just that the BoD members sometimes have no idea what the TC is about 20:31:05 like they think the Board is above it 20:31:05 Heh 20:31:13 that's kinda sad 20:31:38 so rather than spend meeting time explaining it, Alan suggested that I prepare some homework reading for board members 20:31:41 I've had at least two conversations about who should set the roadmap for OpenStack overall recently, so that would be a nice thing to discuss over dinner too 20:31:49 But I don't think we should add it to that agenda, as its too full already 20:32:14 it's kinda there already 20:32:36 external view of goals, product management, integrating user feedback, etc. 20:32:57 Yeah, this is more "where will openstack be in two / five years" 20:33:22 But anyway, its an over beer conversation 20:33:30 mikal: probably be too many people at dinner to have effective conversation about it 20:33:30 OK, anything more on that subject ? 20:33:50 kinda related, just thougt of it 20:33:50 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Win-The-Enterprise 20:33:58 a new initiative by some board members 20:34:07 was mentioned on foundation@ list 20:34:23 ends with " Once the Board has approved the work group report from the previous phases, the workgroup will engage community members to execute Action Plans. This could include developing new blue prints, making upstream contributions and engage with other work groups (ex. analyst relations) to collaborate on the appropriate actions. " 20:34:39 just FYI for everyone that this is happening 20:34:52 That's very inline with what people are asking me about road maps 20:35:07 god I hate the term "enterprise". 20:35:09 i.e. who at the foundation / board / tc is tracking feature gaps which hurt openstack adoption and fixing them 20:35:15 I'm sure the board members involved would appreciate input on providing that input and action plans in an effective way 20:35:32 Yeah, I only just learnt about this initiative 20:35:34 a lot of that is happening downstream 20:35:38 I shall read the etherpad 20:35:44 but some more coordination would probably be a productive thing 20:35:52 rustlebee: it would be nice to have more cooperation on that stuff 20:35:53 it's also stepping over the user committee, but meh 20:35:55 I think sdagues point about the user survey effectiveness is very relevant here 20:35:58 rustlebee: to avoid forking etc 20:36:15 kind of orthogonal to forking, i think 20:36:26 i just mean that downstreams do these things to set their own priorities for what to work on upstream 20:36:33 rustlebee: ok, let me rephrase as "duplicated effort" 20:36:40 sure 20:36:51 I think we should welcome any group attempting to put together analysis like this 20:36:56 agree 20:36:59 rustlebee: the problem is that is leading to what we have today 20:37:07 which is an explosion of incubated projects 20:37:09 doesn't let us off the hook from highlighting what we see are gaps tho 20:37:14 I suggest we move on to "minor governance change" and we use open discussion to continue to talk about that joint meeting 20:37:16 and some core concerns not getting addressed 20:37:27 ttx: that's fine with me 20:37:28 #topic Minor governance changes 20:37:38 I selected a number of minor changes that should probably not wait two weeks to make further progress: 20:37:50 * Adds integrated and incubated release names to programs.yaml (https://review.openstack.org/81859) 20:38:00 This one is ripe for approval and will cause a number of rebases 20:38:21 will approve after meeting unless someone objects 20:38:35 * Update sphinx doc repository layout and toctrees (https://review.openstack.org/91422) 20:38:46 I fixed that one up based on feedback about the symlinks 20:38:54 This one will need to be rebased on top of the recent membership updates 20:39:19 but then it can be approved if nobody objects 20:39:19 yep, I'll do that tomorrow 20:39:25 * Render member list in HTML output (https://review.openstack.org/91450) 20:39:27 Depends on the previous one 20:39:39 that will be rebased at the same time 20:39:40 also a logistics change, will be approved if nobody objects 20:39:50 * Add project mission statement for Ceilometer (https://review.openstack.org/87526) 20:40:07 This one still needs some feedback from the OP. Will approve if it gets 7 +1s (and shall be rebased on top of Anne's change) 20:40:18 * Add the Kite key distribution service to programs.yaml (https://review.openstack.org/84811) 20:40:22 ttx: jogo has some questions about the ceilometer one, but I asked him to comment on the review 20:40:27 ttx: not sure if he's done it yet though 20:40:37 mikal: I have 20:40:47 we are waiting to hear back from the owner 20:40:49 This one looks good, we could use the formal approval of the PTL there but once we have it, i'll approve this unless someone complains 20:41:04 also will need to be rebased on top of Anne's change 20:41:21 or was it already 20:41:33 yes it was 20:41:38 * Add oslo.db to the Oslo program (https://review.openstack.org/90127) 20:41:47 This one has PTL approval, but will need to be rebased on top of Anne's change 20:42:43 All of those are not really policy changes but mostly maintenance and logistics, so will approve them without waiting for 7 YES unless someone posts a -1 20:43:09 * ttx approves Anne's one now 20:43:21 ttx: https://review.openstack.org/92429 is similar, adding oslo.i18n 20:44:00 dhellmann: ok 20:44:30 Anne's one is now merged, that should clarify 20:45:28 #topic Open discussion 20:45:37 We shall obviously skip next week meeting 20:46:15 For the week after, we have 4 projects left on our requirements gap analysis 20:46:26 Glance Swift Horizon and Heat 20:47:10 I'll see which one can go next 20:47:42 more discussion about the joint meeting ? 20:47:51 is everyone coming ? 20:47:54 I don't need to talk about the joint meeting any more 20:47:56 I'm coming though 20:48:03 yep, will be there. 20:48:05 I'll be there 20:48:16 yup 20:48:43 yep 20:49:22 yup 20:49:28 any specific bullet point from the agenda you want a clear outcome from ? 20:49:54 my pick would be on "Clarify devs usage of the OpenStack trademark" 20:51:08 I'd like the discussion of the CLA to at least lead to a "next step" decision 20:51:31 the response to those patches that were blocked because people couldn't sign the CLA this cycle was underwhelming. 20:52:15 I hope the CLA discussion will reboot some members opinion about it 20:52:25 so far they have had only the lawyers part of the story 20:52:42 it can't hurt to hear the community side 20:52:45 right 20:52:58 not sure that will get to a "next action" though 20:53:22 also the dinner could be a better way to win the hearts of members over this issue 20:53:23 well, next action will be to discuss further at the cross-project session 20:53:33 once it's been introduced as an issue, even for just 5 min 20:53:44 markmc: are the board members going to be able to get into that? 20:53:47 beyond that, it'll be getting into bringing a real proposal for change to the board 20:54:01 dhellmann, dunno, it's not the audience I hoped for anyway 20:54:04 ok 20:54:16 dhellmann: we first need rough consensus in the dev community about it 20:54:21 indeed 20:54:54 I'll have some background material for the board by Sunday 20:54:59 Anything else, anyone? 20:55:40 Can't wait to see you all in a few days 20:55:48 safe travels all 20:55:49 indeed 20:56:15 Yep, looking forward to it 20:57:39 I need to change location before the next meeting, so dropping offline for a sec 20:58:32 time to end meeting, thanks all 20:59:24 #endmeeting